The Sun. — London, England, 1810-05-12 00:00:00

SIR F. lit.lRl)F. r. The SPEAKER acquainted the noose that he had .‘,. t-ived a let it:r . from the Earl of Mo'ra,which, if it (ri as thesp!easore of the House, would be read. The let'er was in substance as follows: "s I _R ' • " St. James's Place, May 8— ". Mr. Carrow, my Solicitor, .has represented to me a cir. eninstance, which I think incumbent •on me to impart toyou. It is, that Sir . Francisliurdett has commenced a suit in the Court of King's-Bench against ine, as - Lonstable of the Tower, for illegal detention in prison. Ido not write £his for the purpose of soliciting your interference, as I have already dire:AO any Solicitor to defend the action, on the grounds of the Warrant of the Speaker of the House of Com mons, and that of the Secretary of State.. 1, am, Sir, &c. fs' MOIRA." The Letter was ordered to be entered on the Journals. ' REPORT OF THE com-miTTEE OF PRIVILEGES. MI. DAVIES GIDDY brought, up the Report of the Committee on 'the proceedings had and to be had on the notices, &c. of. Sir F. Burdett. • - The Caeata then proceeded to read the .report, which was of considerable length, and to thin fol.:. lowing purport Aft,;r recurring to the events of the stll April, the report proceeds to enumerate the various subjects of its consideration, namely the Speak is Warrant ; Sir F. Burdett's letter ; 'the report of the Serjeant at the Bar, the notices, process, and writ - son the Speak- - er and Serjeant, which latter,The Report observes, are subscribed with the name of Ellis, Solicitor, and are tor. the-purpose of bringing as a question in a Court of Law the condua of the House. ft hen states the wish of the CorrinAee to colled,as nearly as possible, in one view, this important' subjed and tq prove, from Parliamentary History, tlidt:•the right of the House in committing to prison for breach of privilege is well feunded on many instaticeSand pre‘ cedents, to state the various proceedings at law, and their acknowledged analogy so e.e subject in ques-' lion. These latter topics, however, would be re- served tbr another report. Tht Committee could confid, tidy state that, the practices adopted ,were usual, and founded on the instancos whith arose froth the proceeding of Charles I, and 11. when their in uoya; ions wan.- resisted, and resented by the House of Commons ; .which finally and direetly led to the Bill of Rights. The Cennmittee did tint hesitate to say, that an article of the Bill of R directly ex- tended to the present case. On this aubjed the law of Parliament is. especially declared in the rolls of Henry _VIII. when it appears it was expedient always to allow -tuft costs and punishment for the protection ,of its privileges.. The report then cites the case of Sir J. Elliott in 1604 ; and then that of J. Topham in Jane 1670, who was Serjeant at Arms, and against wit nn, for discharging the coaananda of the House a judgment had been granted; on this the HOuse re aol, ed, tt the Judges of the King's Bench had been guilty of a areach 01 privilege; they were accordingly called,to the-Bar, when Sir F. Pemberton, and Sir F. Jones, stated that the ri Ho , e was right in its de cision.. 'flee report, 'after mentioning . 'a few more mi. ; or ca--es, goes on to state the condo& of the ,• Hoes".. proceedings of arte=is againstMeni bars a!,.1 -:cants ;• on this- subjed it-cited the opitiinn . - laf Justice 'Jrey,. which 'ls • .that- if .: .slember or a Member's servant v...... ed, it was the privilege Of the House that he should b:e. immediately delivered. The Coinre.ittee ,had twiny in •ancSs of this before them ; howeve:r in the I 2111 and 13th of and Mary, this privilege was curtailed, as also in the reign et QUeen Anne;. still it applied only deliverytrom arias,and• did not limit the rights of the House with ,respect 4 ! :i . breach of privilege.. -It appeared to the Committee that • institnting an adion, against the House was-.a . breach of privileges,- and that several instances are ob record of proceeding not only against, the party who • institutes the.aalion,. but against" the Solicitor. The `report cancfuded,by suggesting it as expedient, that the-House• should give leave to the Speaker and -, Serjeaot to appeal in Court to explain the grounds On which they had aded, and to plead in .abatement of jiirisf4tion. Mr. D. GIDDY, before the motion for the report lying on the table, thought it- necessary to state t o • the House the three modes of conduct either of . which it might pursue.—Firs', he would have ad vised a proseciition at law to be entered for a breach. of the -privileges of the Hoow, hod there, on look ing into the Journals, appeared a path of this naa ture chalked out by the Constitution. The second, and the better way; would be to commit to prisOns for breach of privilege, the person who bad served the process. That this power has belonged invari ably to the House is evident ; but if, in the present instance, it was unwilling to - exert that power, at the same time it should be understood it was within • its reach- However, the House would decide -upon this. - The third mode would be to direct a - Court below to institute- pleadings. With respect to this he wished to suggest to the House; that if it should think • right to allow the Speaker and Ser jeant to plead, they must either plead in abate ment of jurisdiction or in bar. The latter Would require -sonic time, but if the fotmer was adopt .ed, no, tithe would be - lost. He tinderstOed that to-morrow was the last day of hearing such pleas. innved that the Report should lie on the table. • • .L , ,rd MILTON observed, that no one could st si lent atter hearing the conclusion of the fic.4)ur able Gentlethan's speech. ',He understociclthat ' the .objel of the Report was to defend the aaion which had been io..tituted against the House. Ifthe Speaker were to appcar in such a situation, tf ihe Court were .to proix - ed' ith ihe a(-,lion, the House should Consi;. !der the situation in which - it Would be placed. We are aboln,mid the. Noble Lord to defend an action in an infcrier,C.ourt, %%hen' we , know dint the only appeal .is to thnflouse of Lords; the consequence resulting .froth= t'iris is , that r):`11 - piivileges are to be decided on Ilouse. 'Was this House now to give 'pp the advantages it had obtained in the . :ease of the Ayles -bury eledion, and•traceback the path it Dad proceed - ed in for a'century ? Whatever might be done with - ,the report, he considered of inferior. moment, but enfreatrd Gentlemen• to• consider therfatal con= equctiees which may ensue if tbiS doctrine is adopt ed. Were the pi ivilttges of. the . House of Commons to he overturned in the Court Of. - King's Bencil AV,ItTe they to be 'then • frittered away He 'over- - f heard a 'Noble Lon! near him ' . (Lord Folkstone) c a ll . • ;0'5 , ..1 privileges illegal, but he would miintain -they ere not so . ---they . .were foutfaed on the law of the lai:d; and it perinitted thus td be - attacked and taken fr.t'ay one after another, those privileges by which the country was protected, would soya cease i 9 exist. Granting tharone of these .privileges was imprope-.- ly used, was the House on that account to give up one of the greatest safeguards 'it and the nation pos• sessed ? - He hoped that ProvidenCe„ would , avert the.day that the Speaker of the House of COrn. mons should appear -a ,pleader - at the bat of the Court of Kitt's Bench then might their . le ges be said to be at end. extent of them. When the case came before ant"- ' tiler Court, that Court would look to the decision of this House in - regard-to its privileges, by that dCci sion they are bound, and must a& accordingly. Mr. PONSONBY observed, that the only question now was, whether the report should lie On the ta ble, and he tegretted that the house had not decided that question before they had entered into what he conceived to be a premature discussion. The mere laying of the-report on the 'table signified no more to the main question, than if.he - 7.ixlere to.takePtf his hat and throw it on the table. He hoped therefore that House would put an end to all' apprehension ; on that score ) and hot-the report be laid on the ta ble; that being accomplished, he •hoped Ministers would then muster uO.resolutimi enough. to tell the House what course they meant to recommend on the occasion. The question was then put, and the report was ordei-ed to lie on thetable. Mr. DAVIES GIDDY again rose to make a motion founded on the report. He expressed his regret that some Gentlemen named on the Committee had not done their duty by attending in the _Committee, because then their-opinions might have been known. The Hon. Gentleman then recapitu lated what he had stated on moving, bat the re , port be laid on the table, as to tlaethree modes to be pursued, viz. first, the inhibition to the Courts of 1.33. v in proceeding in the action—secondly, as to the Committal of every person concerned in stung out the writ against the Speaker, or in ' serving the notice of trial (which would not- pre clude the parties from proceeding in the ; and • thirdly, the pleading in extenuation, .or in Bar, to the action. He therefore should move that the Speaker and Serjeant might, as there was no time to be lost, be permitted to appear and plead, meaning to follow, pp that ,motion with an other that the Attorney-General' be direaed to kr fend them. The Hon. Gentleman, after making sume further observations, moved " That the _Speaker and Serjeant be permitted to appear. and plead to ihe said actions." . On the question being put, ?d. PONsoNay arose... lie presumed that the MO ! . tion just made tnet with the concurrence of his Ma jesty's Ministere.. Before he proceeded. he wished to understand whether he was correet in that suppo sition. Lord FoLKSTONE did not intend to address the House had not an eXpression of his 'been o'er heard by the Noble Lord who had just sat down. He contended that there might arise a state of pSi vilege ilh'gal enough to be disputed in a Court of Justice ; for instance, if it had assumed the power of pillory ; suppose it had sent Mr. Gale Jones on a horse with his face to the tail, to Charing-cross, there to be pot on the pillory, and afterwatds sent to Newgate, in such a case it would be unjust ; if there was no redress, it would be monstrous if it had exercised such a right. He wished the House to take into consideration the Suestion of pleadingin bar. He thought the report defic ga ienfin many points on which it pretended to infortn'the House. He ad verted to its st4.tements-respeding the proceedingsin a Coot of JuStice in the third of. Cliailes I. and its • arguments on the Bill of Rights, Which he said did not relate to any thing in but out of 'Parliament.— 'rlie - .case of Sir J. Elliot, which had bee' contended i as a breach of privilege, had been tried hi the Court below, nor was the declaration then sufficient till a Writ of error bad been entered in the House of Lords. 1 The Report had taken notice of the case of Sir F. , Pemberton, but he conceited it initiossible on this ground to maintain the•bdrine of pleading in abate : naent of jurisdiction. If this were persisted in,. it would be impossible not to examine the privileges of the House, but if it had been acted upon accord ing to those privileges, which be acknowledged to be a khown law, though, as Lord Coke sap, not - muchiougheafter. . Mr. WHITEHEAD rose to order.—The qtestion before the House was, ' whether the -Report should, lie on the table.. . The- Learned Gentlemen, le said, who frame() this petition, should tell the House whatthey intended to do, and not endeavour to take advantage of what might be now said. TO the question itself he had no objection. ' _ Mr.,'W. Wys NE agreed with the doelrine of he Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Giddy). He was of opinion that Whatever related to the privileges of the . . House'should be discussed here, and no weere else . . t The ,•CriANCELLOR of • the EXCHEQUER had co In this principle he-Could see nothing contrary 16 difficulty in answering in the affirmative. , . reason or justice.' He then quoted the case of Mr. Mr. PONSONDY said, that he would be ' the-last White, who in the year h 659 bad been fined 10001. j man to , :advise such a contest as that Right Hon. for being guilty of a hreach of privilege. It is cer- Gentleman had involved. the House in ; but being tain that the House might haveeabused its privileges once engaged in it, he would be among the first to '' in one or two iaseeices, but it did not therefore 10l- offer auce advice as he thought to be expedient. It . low that it 7 . Hal totally resign them. Mr. Fox, he was for this reason he thought that the Right Hon. Gentleman. ou g ht no t t o s h r i n k f rom t h e respons i, said, was' et - opiniois that it was absurd •to argue On . the extssenes of privilege, which were so nicely ba- bility of giving his advice in a difficulty which he lanced. If the prineiphe of destroying the privileges had not shrunk from the responsibility 'of -creating. of Parliames , were encouraged, the King might Or Upon a question which had so considerably ens der' the '.. regiment of Foot Guards to March into grossed and agitated the public mind, he kneW not whether the- opinions . he - was a b ou t to o ff er woul d the lioese of Lords, and take their seats as Peers, ' , be 'popular or u np o p u l ar — w h et h er the magnitude ie t t ;he COtirt of .Pailiament should be the source and publicity of th e su bj ect wou ld v i s it upon him avower was convinced was the first principle of 1' t a weight of odium or appl aus e, altoge,ther dii.prh abuse; •Ithe Cohstitutien ; that power it might perhaps . portioned t o hi s h u mbl e an d o b trus i ve eff o rts to do nit it should not, therefore; tail .under the . jurisdidion of an inferior Court. If s ei s s ,,, em his - duty conscientiously ; but this h e kn e w, t h at were once established; - With equal justice might the =this was a question of that unparalleled importance,- Court of Quarter Sessions decide on the conductof that if it be decided in a cer t a i n way , t h e lib ert i es Gentleman• of that, country were at an end.. He. thought that that of King's Bench. The Learned . noticed the case of. Sir W Waite's - Is, which wa s re . -House had the ri g ht o f .comm i tt i ng _f or a lib e l .. . pui tc-d fr.;:n tl';‘: Conumnittee appointed so inquiti ihto This wns his oonscientionC npinion--an opinion that' might be unpopular, and which h e s ho u ld regret the merits of it; and the opulion of that COminittee e - was, that Sir Robert Sawyer - oisght to be heard by., to find so for,, as a Member of Parliame n t, h e •to d . must ever respeti the opini on s of the people. H e Counsel, and the Attorney-General was directed ai would then, however,,as he wou ld t h e Ki ng, ser v e ' • fend loin: There 'was-another cast, which we san action - brought by my 'Lord Peterba both, but flatter neither. I n p rocee di ng to state h i s opinion, he should gr oun d w h a t b e h a d to o ff er upon . rough for Scan. Mag. i , i,..hici, , was compromised by ' the payment of -daiiiiiees to the, amount Of 1501. two principles :—the first was, that each House of These cases, however, were sufficient to shew, that Parliament was, .in its respedive capacity, the sole in all times the power and authority' of the House , judge of its own p r i v il eg e s —the so l e j u d ge h ow f a r had been exercised; and never denied; when it be- thOse,privileges are to be carried—and the sole judge came a question in any of the Cowls of Law.: •In of the manner in which such privileges are to bp addition to these, Gentlemen, if they would take the'! exercised. It f o llowed- by cons equence , t h at n o trouble to refer to R. find a case in which one Bur R. North's Lite of the Lord Keep- other Court in this country had the. right inter, er Guildford, would pose their opinion- upon what was privilege of Par - l don e an attorney, having infringed the privileges of liament—the nature, the extent, o r th e exerc i se c this House, was ordefed into the custody of the Ser- it. The other proposition which he would lay jeans at Arms; it so happened, that betore the Ser- t down as a principle was, that whenever the Court- jeant at Arms could arrest.Burdon e the House was I of Parliament,; no matter which . House of Par prorogued, an d B ur d on b roug h t hi s adion•of da- • liament, had declared - a matter to be paivilege, - mages against the carjeant for asaa u lta, as o f ten as h e that, all other Courts throughout the countr y attempted to take him, for Burdon resisted the exe- were bound to pay respett and implicit obedience cution of the warrant. Ito that declaration. To shew that lie did not The ATTORNEY-GENERAL rose to offer his full speak from him se lf merely, that, the o pi n i ons h e h ad and entire approbatiOn to the explicit statement of formed had th e sandion of the wi ses t an d the the• Learned Gentleman, in answer to the - reasons greatest authorities ; h e s h ou ld ; as she went along, which the Noble Lord had given, why the House refer to some-hooka he had brought with him, and should not . be allowed to hold the possession of the to prevent all rnistakes - slilting from a. l apse o f me jurisdidion which they claimed. The whole of the mory, or inaccuracy, of transcription—as also to arguments of the Noble, Lord went to inculcate the evince that he made no purposely _garbled - extract opihion that if this jurisdiction was allowed, then it that bore a differept meaning from the. whole of the alias unconstitutional, because the subject must suf- context from which it was aaken, he should read fer, having no Court to which he could appeal in case the passages from the books • themselves : the of wrong. Ilthat . arguinent went for any thing, it first book to which he should lefer, was, -Sir Ma- WAs equally applicable to a Court of Law, because, thew , Hale's Treatise _upon the Original Ihstitn making every allowance ter the infirmities of man's nee, . Power,, and Jut - Licht-lion .of Parliatnehto— nature, the decision "might be that the House had the Fero the Right Honourable Gentleman r e f eree d right to imprison, and that might be suppOsed an to the books, - and read from it a passage which was error in judgment. He would suppose au action in substance as follows : ‘,l l For as emery Court 'of iva4'brought in the Common Pleas, and. such a deei- , Juice bath laws and costoins for ita.clireci ion ; some Sion was %come to, - that a writ of error - Was had . to- the civil and canon, souse the - conuitou law, in the King's Bench; and that the JPdges stiOrild i others their own recalia laws and customs,-so th e collude together to defeat the law of the land (whieh ' High Ceprt of Parliainenr bath also its oe.hi peculia‘r he should not for a moment believe), :and that the ,law, called - the lec et consuetudo Pifilia , neuti. Buis delriier resort was the House of Lords, -who should proptlis regnlis et consuetudinibai‘consistit Silo lee, a on the appeel, come to a' similar . decision. Then, law not - to be judgedOf byy - other Courts, o r : gees e be:would ask, what remedy. had the tarty aggrieved tioned therein, and the same is law, because ieCun who stiffered by the decision ?--Would it be 'con- dam legem et consuetudinem Pailiamenti; and the l'a- - tended, that because a jurisdiction might;in the•ex. ther for, that every• Member of Parliament bath a jue ercise of it; be abused, that; th - erefOre, it could not i diCial place, and cannoshe a witness." Here he neSd exist in laW ?' 'Such a profeasition was monstrous, t scarcely remind tlse HOttste hat Lord.Hale.took large:- and if suffered to obtain; inust not'only put an end i ly from Sir Edward Coke, Whose opinions upon this to all the priarileg - es, but also to the 'administration .great question bad beeri- ,adopted implicitly by of justice its. every Court in The kingdom. The i Lord Hale; both these great aottiorities had ildirrried Learned Gentleman - . opposite hadeso . we ll elucidated the'priv ilege of Parliament to be trot merely ler Par ibe subjea'ts that it was not necessary for him to say liaMen‘ari,ier tetrce, not the lass of that House but more on that part of the _ case ; - 'to allow the inter-,; the - law of Pie land.. There was, bewever, one oba ference of any of the loWer Courts would be to 1 JeCtion to which he could not more opportunely ad pair With all jurisdiaibe -.;- as U , cll might it be' said e vert to thin new ; it • had been Industriously giveh that the Court of Quartee Shsseona had the right of : out that : though. these lawyers • weie in general interfering with the Court a sting's Benclo•or the e sound legal authorities, that; yet they had Miler lUD highest tribunal, the House of' Lords,, as that the, mhch reverence 101' hirliameot—that they_ had too Court of King's Bench could: controhl the aurisdics , high a notion of the, powers and euthorities. of 'l),;r- Lion. of this House. The House . Of Commons Were . 'lien - tent, and were,. in tact, too muel c.l dsib- ,1 a s ou t y s t, le the sole judges of their own: privileges, and of the , abject prejudices of their days, to be relied upon los- pliCifly in the enlightened philosophy of (he et'eceti.r: times. He would not here st o p to comber'. pre." j . . • -• • udite by , prejud7ce, or ekamine how far an :so, frivolous should' be allewed - to .inealidate an sutliolity so weighty ; but he would take one of tildie Whom he had understood to have been chiefly kelied T upon out of that lionse, as . layieg down 0 0' pions hostile io the extent end exercise of their pri" vileges : he meant Sir William Blacksione. Judge had been cited in away so imperfeElly- as t 9 the context, and so ignorantly as to the copse" ,gnence, (hat' he was considered by wine of those whb had suffered therriselves to be - so egregiously deceived; as l a yi n g d own principles incompatible with what were called the 'Privileges of Pad* ment. 'Here the 'Right Honourable dentleeerP. referred to Blackstone 's Comrnentaria, and i:e o 4 from it a passage to the following died :-ee" Maxims upon which they proceed, together with ill method' of proceeding, rest entirely in. the. breast of the.Parliarneet 'itself; aedare'not dt fined - and aster' tamed- by any particular stated laws.-111e.prix'? leges of Parliament are likew . oe very large and r e b7e` definite.' And therefore when in 31 Hen. VI.- lbee: House of- Lords propounded a question to theiteles' concerning them, the Chief Just ice' Sir John Fortes" cue, in the name of hts brethren, 'declared,. ", that ' they ought .n e t to' make' answer to that question for it hash not been used aforetime- that 0 4 Justices should in any wise determine- - th e privi" leges. of the High Court of Ritlimente- For it iti so high and mighty in its nature, that _it may make law : and -that- which is law, it may make 11° . late : and 'the determination and knowledge °I that privilege belongs to the -Lords of Parliament , and. trot to the-Justices." • Privilege of Parliament • • was principally established, in order to pr o tect its Members not only feom b e i ng mo l este d by the ir fellow 7 sobjeds, but also more especially from being oppressed by the power.of the Ctown. If, there' fore all the privileges of Parliament were. once . to be set down and ascertained, and tio privilege tobe allowed but what was so defined and :determined , i ‘ were easy for the executive power to devise s° l '' e new case, .not within the line of privilege, and 110-1 der pretenee: thereof to harass any refractory Mem." bear. and violate the freedom of, Pe - liar:tent. dign i ty and independence of the two Houses are there' lore in a great measure preserved by keeping Ole ic privileges -indefinte."—After having read this P 35. sage from Blackstone's Commentaries, .be hoped t° Lear no more of Sir William ilackstone• He flex . referxed to a treatise written'on the Power of part i .: ament,,by Sir Robert Atkin s , one o f t h e J u d g es the Cotirt of CoMmon Pleas . ---a man whoa) bi 6 described as a - sound and - constitutional Lawyer., He read e - passage frOM the sixty-ninth page °I this' treatise, which was in - substance that " Ha y : lug- made it appear -that the power of . the High Court of Parliament; though divided sometimes the*xercise, was:.the same in effeel, however exer t : cited, whether in its legislatii e capacity as a bran" of the Legislature e or in its iud.cial character as the Magna Curia, orin capacey of-a Council,•as Communia Cqatsilia Beg nit" Though all7s:dtastrin' was now thought not to - he maintainable in the'9 enlightened times, :Jet this - was- no new discovery' , the same objections were started - a- hundred years ago, but the objection was rested upon the-atria:ta t principle, indepen..knt of the Constituton; and• tint upon ary principle - derivable from the Constittition• The objection rested on a principle that applied t° ,all-Governments. Ncine.had, noneever could_nec' l "; stitnted so perfect as' not to leave a discr m - tiona r y pow' somewhere. This was the principle of the objections of Lord Heir, in that...memorable case in Vine!) dissented from the eleven Judges of that day, , H is argument was, that the aouse of Commons ryay. declare any thing' th e y please' privilege. But tl ) '; proved nothing m o re t h an t h at power mig ht b abused- e -Was it, therefore, not to exist at all ? Y eP a sty the Objection s , b ut i n a detipite form.. .1301 !", law of the land said otherwis--the moment pr'T lege of Parliarne.nt became defiehe it was subjugan h f The law of the-land was not to be overturned. - the law of Parliam en t . b e suppose d to b e limited IV; sound discretion, th e J u d ges are eat to presll-1% 'otherwise. The Jud g e s are in .to case to prestyl i . that Parliament h a s abused .their privileges; th eir privileges ,exist in itheir ow n goo d pl easure; thei r ! own discretion is the essence of- that privilege• - :-" If .the one be removed the other is. destioyesi, sides Lord Hoot's objection went as leech to liunea, nature itself as to the privilege of PA - hail - Jew, WW l ' men are men, some part of the . most,peifeet nary Government must b e left the discretion thelir rulers. But- Loud Holt, in laying down b !: opinion neon a siegelar iticiple, stood alone that opinion. Was it nothing that "die rein - 3401_ 11 judges of the land were of an opposite opinion. And here it was carefully to be remetil6,-,r,A, an eng them there were many as z:ble, sound, C°'' ; H •stitutiorial Lawyers as L o rd H o le hiMself. Bo' 1 ,1 had been argu e d; th a t n o unlined undctitls' power ought to be known by the g e did' not argue thus for what . oug h t t o h e, b ut * w h'tt *actually . was: The Constitution vese l ei and-there could be no Constitution under which fnUst . not' vt.st 'disc:fttrio() sorUe w here. ',if A.if King's Bench passes an erroneous judgmcnt in 14 1 %." there-lay an appeal' by Writ of Eire to the Hoe' of Lords—their Loreships may ceetirm that T rutt; indgment instead e Ofeesci ding it, here injuryar a reMede e ebut who would,ar"% d front thence egeinst the ~ vi,dpi,n of vesting such cretion in:the Hotee ? It the Jud ges o f the king's . ,Bench were guilty so:: willutcorruptgii), ,the 00 0 . , e of Co 4 1) 01_0 . 0 t at; e coniz.trice(l-. such alleL" offeeee, eat: p.roceed to pruseetue such malversatio n to . .con"dign -.punislimeot e But Who shall calf lb ° Parliteneet to account'? if the people dO Clot prove of the cendect of their Bepiestentatives, iheY may ref uee to - re 7 elect them mgein roact for t 1 W l ° in diet f-L - 2 - )use when they go beck to than for re-cie"e" ion. The, people sorely would not proce e d tost4 l ' the Parliament by 'at tempts if, depri ve t h em o f t heir privilge.s. lint it was stilt contended, that the HoP' s c had no power to conirnit!or libel. Where s , he 'itgr'..• were they to lot* for the privilege of Parliatnent• tt no! in the Customs and pr:ictices of Rirlianeen[ ?"" such a position, the api)lic3,-, titer w‘es not e diflicult ; ter e froe, the earli es t tttitt litAsoltad -- beeri in habit conlinitting .f°f - lib 1, and y'.4l , !erous 6:piessions. They woctu tin) instance of it so. tar hasek -as in the 59• 11 pvolume .'of eee of the first volum'of their Jo urn al s , f o llowed .by .numerous othi.-rs in the.subsequent volumes. La v, of Parliament was on this head as, dear, :16 I Ili CI ba •W 1 th .ha - th '0( tit t)I " 11 'f